Hacker News Reader

Comment by gonational | Hacker News Reader

> wants to ensure that universities, governments and companies outside the United States can help develop its open-source technology

Read as:

> wants to ensure that China...

Let me see if I understand this correctly. US tax dollars funded (in part, via UC Berkeley) this technology, and now this organization is moving outside of the US specifically so that it can work with China in ways that the US would not appreciate. And we (“we” being an audience almost entirely based in the Occident) are all cheering this on?

Do you think they are worried about that US blocking them from working with Oxford, or with the Spanish government? This is because they got money from Alibaba.

Is this the same group that was defending South Park and bashing on the NBA just weeks ago?

Gimme a fuckin break.

View on HN

Both sentiments are pointed in the same direction - more freedom.

Also, Blizzard, South Park, NBA are part of popular culture in the west. Cooperation with China is endangering that culture, so you see backlash.

Standards related to RISC-V are not part of popular culture and there is no danger of Chinese censorship. There is however danger of USA protectionism.

And yes - I can see Americans using microchip intellectual property against Europeans. EU is right there on the list of trade foes with China and Russia according to USA president.

I’m all for cooperation with China and the diminishment of national culture (not forgetting it but also accepting others) and a better understood global culture.

What I’m not ok with (and why I think there’s backlash toward the cooperation with China by these companies) is the way the Chinese government treats people.

Harvesting organs from political prisoners and the violence toward protesters isn’t ok. Ever. I don’t care if it’s Trump or Merkel or Xi that’s doing it it’s not ok and that’s not something people should cooperate with.

> USA protectionism

Is it just maybe possible that the US public is waking up to the ongoing genocide, ethnic cleansings, and widespread human rights violations in China, which may lead to the state being sanctioned like so many other despicable regimes?

No. The average person in the US doesn't care about these things or even know about them. What is finally starting to make sense is that other countries have next to no regulations, and literal sweat shops, and US workers are feeling the effects these are having. IE, it's all about money.

No, because then US would stop doing business with Saudi-Arabia.

The fact that you consider the two similar betrays some pretty serious ignorance.

The US backs (either financially, politically, or militarily) 70% of the world's dictatorships -- many of which were placed into power after US-organised coups overthrew their democratically-elected leaders. Yemen has open-air slave markets, thanks to the US's bombings and destabilisation of the region.

The point is that "we are doing the humane thing" is not an argument that the US has legitimate access to anymore.

Also let's not forget that Saudi Arabia treats women as third-class citizens. Let's not pretend they're some paragon of virtue.

>US tax dollars funded (in part, via UC Berkeley) this technology,

Term 'open-source' license seems to be conveniently left behind in the 'Read as'.

Linux kernel was first funded by the Tax money of a Finland Citizen, the reason everyone can use it incl. large U.S. corporations entirely dependent upon it is because it is under the 'freedom' of open-source license.

RISC-V, is moving to protect the 'freedom' of it's open-source license. If there is anything to feel agitated about it, it is why some entity had to take such drastic action from the so called 'land of the free'.

> Gimme a fuckin break.

Sorry if this is a first for you. It's been a very long time however that the US has been successful (and this is a compliment) at commercializing tech that was invented elsewhere. US is a huge beneficiary of the bad business climate elsewhere and international brain drain. This is just a taste of how it works when e.g. european companies emigrate to the US (again, because the US is a better place for them). Consider that the US won the business world because of its openness, not in spite of it.

> based in the Occident

OK Rudyard Kipling.

> Let me see if I understand this correctly. US tax dollars funded (in part, via UC Berkeley) this technology, and now this organization is moving outside of the US specifically so that it can work with China in ways that the US would not appreciate.

Given the open source nature of the tech, one assumes they are (rightly or wrongly) moving out of the US so they can continue to work with whoever they want.

People are cheering it on because there are no viable openly licensed ISAs besides RISC-V and the alternative to this move is RISC-V being crippled due to sanctions. Anybody in the US is just as free to use the ISA, and designs and fab IP can still be proprietary in whatever country.

The signals from the current US administration is pretty clear. It is a government that puts American interest ahead of any other concern. Naturally universities in other western countries are going to have their doubts about cooperating on crucial technology if it is under control by a government which only cares about national interests.

Same reason I favor exiting NATO and building a European alliance only. The US cannot be trusted. Look at what was done at a whim in Turkey.

Look at how the current US administration screwed us in the Iran deal.

Trump did not commit to defending other NATO allies, when asked. Hence what is the point of NATO? There is no point in being member of a defense alliance which the US uses when it suits them but which they are not committed to when it is inconvenient for them. That isn't an alliance at all.

> The signals from the current US administration is pretty clear.

If it was only the current US administration then it would be easier. Didn't the bush administration also had a policy "You're either for us, or against us"?

Even in the case the current administration is replaced, it's only 4 or 8 years until they are again replaced by another administration willing to blow up alliances for domestic politics.

Not really. Previous administrations had a much greater tolerance before countries were placed in the 'against camp'. The current administration has dubbed more countries enemies than prevously - Germany for example. The the fun of following a nationalist agenda.

> It is a government that puts American interest ahead of any other concern.

I always have a hard time swallowing the bullshit that is the American government ever held any other concern above American interest, whether the results were favorable notwithstanding.

There was a sensibility for enlightened self-interest that Trump does not understand. Entities like the UN or WTO subjected the US to certain rules, but also subjected everyone else to those same rules. For example, the US gave up the freedom to impose tariffs whenever it likes, but in doing so, ensured that its own companies would have unfettered access to foreign markets. Trump's strategy appears to be to tear down all multilateral institutions, and to bully each country one-by-one into accepting what he wants.

And that's going swimmingly with global growth being the lowest since 2008 and low 2% US growth only being sustained due to insanely high fiscal deficits and monetary easing. Meanwhile business investment is in the toilet which bodes terribly for future long run growth since there is no capital deepening now.

The US pays 22% of the relatively tiny (~2B€) NATO direct budget. France, Germany, and England supply 34% combined. The US also has the something like the idea9th largest military in Europe at ~65K.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-biggest-standing-arm...

Absolutely. In light of all this American antipathy Europe should form its own strong alliance. Relying on an overseas superpower when we could be a superpower ourselves as the EU will bite us eventually. And we will definitely achieve nothing as more than two dozen separate countries.

> It is a government that puts American interest ahead of any other concern

Usually, that's the case, but these days: all roads lead to Putin.

If this change helps the group operate more in the open, and the group operating more in the open ends up benefiting China, I guess I don’t understand why I should have a problem with that. I’m sure lots of open source development has been beneficial to China (among many others of course).

I think your analysis is correct. Before jumping to the “US is a bully” narrative, one should consider:

- they whole problem here is that Hauwei and other state-sponsored Chinese firms are flooding the market with below-cost, compromising devices in order to give the Chinese government broad access to sensitive information [0]

- Hong Kong is dying under the Chinese boot [1]

- China is running concentration camps [2]

Our community isn’t used to thinking about open source software - or technology in general- in the context of geopolitics. We seem to agree IBM was wrong to help the Nazis manage the Haulocaust [3] but don’t apply that logic to China. Yet. Maybe our children will; that’s on us.

This is another skirmish in the long war around the Chinese Rise. America is by no means perfect, but I think we’ll miss Pax Americana when it’s gone. We need to search our souls and find our spines.

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/17/18264283/huawei-security-...

[1] https://www.vox.com/2019/11/18/20970453/hong-kong-protests-2...

[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/fina...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

> Our community isn’t used to thinking about open source software - or technology in general- in the context of geopolitics

I'm old enough to remember when open-source distributions had special "non-US" sections for cryptography that actually worked.

All I ask is that if you have a "this software may not be used to run an internment camp" license, it gets even-handedly applied.

Open-source crypto has no export controls. Private crypto by Raytheon, Lockheed and others has export controls

That was not what people believed at the time, and indeed I don't think any of the relevant laws have ever mentioned "open source" or similar. It's actually still in force, it's just that there are large enough exemptions for HTTPS to work.

e.g. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/complying...

> they whole problem here is that Hauwei and other state-sponsored Chinese firms are flooding the market with below-cost, compromising devices in order to give the Chinese government broad access to sensitive information [0]

Spying aside ( probably - just like US firms ) - isn't the real reason this is an issue at all is because Huawei actually has a technological lead.

Even this very biased article acknowledges that lead. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/12/huawei-china-5g-race-te...

To paint them as winning because they are 'flooding the market with below-cost' is frankly xenophobic - note they have out innovated - not copied - you can't copy yourself a technological lead.

The US appears in panic - imagine a world where CISCO kit ( a company that has obligations to the US state ) isn't installed everywhere - rather some other countries stuff.

If you want to constrain China, then you have to accept the rules that constrain everyone. The time where the US can lord it over everyone ( for better or worse ) is coming to an end - just as the British empire came to an end.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com